II II III II III Mill INI I 

011 521 851 7 



Hollinger Corp. 
P H8.5 



UC 533 

A35 
1918 
(Copy 1 



TONS OR BADGES FOR EXEMPTED PERSONS 

EIMBURSEMENTS FOR CERTAIN EMPLOYEES 
ON FURLOUGH 



HEARING 

BEFORE THE 

.COMMITTEE ON MILITARY AFFAIRS 

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

SIXTY-FIFTH CONGRESS 

SECOND SESSION 

ON 

S. 3472 

TO AUTHORIZE THE SECRETARY OF WAR TO PROVIDE AND 
ISSUE DISTINCTIVE BUTTONS OR BADGES TO MEN DRAFTED 
OR VOLUNTEERING FOR ENLISTMENT IN THE MILITARY 
FORCES WHO ARE EXEMPTED OR REJECTED, AND TO PRO- 
VIDE A PENALTY FOR UNLAWFULLY WEARING, PROCURING, 
OR MANUFACTURING THE SAME. 

ALSO 



H. R. 10522 



AUTHORIZING THE SECRETARY OF WAR TO REIMBURSE 
OFFICERS, ENLISTED MEN, AND CIVILIAN EMPLOYEES IN 
THE MILITARY ESTABLISHMENT FOR CERTAIN DISBURSE- 
MENTS WHILE ON FURLOUGH NECESSITATED BY DISABILI- 
TIES ORIGINATING IN THE SERVICE AND IN LINE OF DUTY 



STATEMENT OF 

REPRESENTATIVE JOHN J. ROGERS 



JUNE 7, 1918 



WASHINGTON 

GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 

1918 



^ 



M> 



: ; ; 



ft 



v&\* 



A 



COMMITTEE UN MILITARY AFFAIRS. 
S. HUBERT DENT, Jr., Alabama, Chairman. 



WILLIAM J. FIELDS, Kentucky. 
PERCY E. QUIN, Mississippi. 
WILLIAM GORDON, Ohio. 
A. C. SHALLENBERGER, Nebraska. 
CHARLES POPE CALDWELL, New York 
JAMES W. WISE, Georgia. 
RICHARD OLNEY, Massachusetts. 
SAMUEL J. NICHOLLS, South Carolina. 
T. W. HARRISON, Virginia. 
DANIEL E. GARRETT, Texas. 
GEORGE R. LUNN, New York. 

Mark L. Black, Clerk. ■ 
Miss Martha Foster, Assistant clerk. 
2 



JULIUS KAHN, California. 
DANIEL R. ANTHONY, Kansas. 
JOHN C. McKENZIE, Illinois. 
FRANK L. GREENE, Vermont. 
JOHN M. MORIN, Pennsylvania. 
JOHN Q. TILSON, Connecticut. 
THOMAS S. CRAGO, Pennsylvania. 
HARRY E. HULL, Iowa. 
JAMES H. DAVIDSON, Wisconsin. 
J. KUHIO KALANIANAOLE, Hawaii. 



•. •t D. 



1919 



BUTTONS OR BADGES FOR EXEMPTED PERSONS— REIMBURSE- 
MENTS FOR CERTAIN EMPLOYEES ON FURLOUGH. 



Committee on Military Affairs, 

House of Representatives, 

June 7, 1918. 

STATEMENT OF HON. JOHN JACOB ROGERS, REPRESENTATIVE 
FROM MASSACHUSETTS. 

Mr. Rogers. Mr. Chairman and gentlemen, I desire to call the 
attention of the committee, I hope very briefly indeed, to two bills 
which are now before the committee. The first is S. 3472, which 
passed the Senate on the 5th of February and which represents sub- 
stantially the recommendations of the Secretary of War last Decem- 
ber. The second is H. R. 12353, which I introduced on the 3d of 
this month. The Senate bill provides for the issuance by the War 
Department of distinctive buttons or badges to men drafted and 
then exempted or men volunteering and then rejected. My bill 
provides for the issuance of distinctive badges or buttons by the 
Secretary of War to men who since the advent of the United States 
into the European War have been honorably discharged from the 
armed forces of the United States. 

To take up first the Senate bill, which I have referred to, it seems 
that there ought to be some safe-guarding provision incorporated 
into it by this committee. The language of the Senate bill as it 
now reads is — 

Thai the Secretary t>\' War be authorized and directed to provide 

and issue to all men who * * have heretofore been or shall 

hereafter be drafted into the military service but subsequently exempted, etc. 

Over a quarter of a million of men have been exempted on the 
ground of alienage. Ft seems to me that it would be absurd for the 
bill to be enacted as it now stands and to give this badge of exemp- 
tion to men who claimed alienage and have been exempted on 
that ground. 

Similarly men have been exempted, though not in anything like 
the same numbers, on the ground of conscientious objections to 
bearing arms in warfare. I don't think there w r ould be any great 
fitness in giving those men exemption buttons. And, finally, a 
small number have been exempted on moral unfitness. Clearly those 
men are not entitled to an exemption button. 

The three classes which I think ought to be given exemption 
buttons are. first, those who are rejected on physical grounds ; second, 
those who are rejected on the ground of dependency: and third, 
those that are exempted on vocational grounds. 



4 BUTTONS OR BADGES FOR EXEMPTED PERSONS, ETC. 

If the committee desires, I have the statistics of those exemptions 
and can insert them. 

Mr. McKenzie. What would you think about giving a man a 
badge who had been exempted on his own affidavit, and all his 
relations he can rake and scrape, and two or three neighbors he 
might get to come an any say it was necessary that he be exempted 
when it was perfectly apparent that he could go to war as well as 
many other people? 

Mr. Rogers. Of course, it is an indictment of the draft boards if 
any such men are exempted. There is vested in the Provost Marshal 
and the President the power of reviewing those cases. If unjust 
exemption has been obtained by a man, it can be reviewed and the 
man put in service. It seems to me the draft boards and the Pro- 
vost Marshal General have in general done their duty, and that a 
man who has been exempted is usually a man who should be ex- 
empted, 

The Chairman. You are mistaken about the power of the Presi- 
dent and the Provost Marshal General. In some cases the action of 
the boards is absolutely final. 

Mr. Rogers. I shouldn't venture to quarrel with this committee 
about what the draft law says, but my recollection was very distinct 
that there was a provision allowing a review in all cases, either by 
the Provost Marshal or the President, where there had been fraud 
or error creeping into the activities of the local draft boards. 

The Chairman. It is reviewed, of course, by the district board, 
and, except in cases of agricultural and industrial claims, the action 
is final, and there must be a dissenting vote from the district board 
before the case may come to the President — that is, unless they have 
changed it recently. 

Judge Wise. As I understand it, there is no such thing as exemp- 
tion. They are put in classes and are deferred, and they have author- 
ity to call these men, although it might be second, third, or fourth 
class. They are not exempted. Therefore a button which states 
they are exempted would not be proper. 

Mr. Rogers. I confess I am not able to cope with that suggestion. 

Mr. Fields. Do you think it would be proper to give a button to 
a man exempted on his own motion and by his own efforts ? 

Mr. Rogers. I am frank to say that this Senate bill, though it has 
the sanction of the War Department and though I believe in it, 
seems to be the less meritorious bill of the two I have referred to. 
In the first place, after all, because it is giving a recognition of non- 
service; in the second place, because it apparently is open to the 
objections that have just been cited. 

Judge Wise. What do you think about this : How would the man 
himself feel going around in a community with a button stuck on his 
coat advertising him to the world? 

Mr. Rogers. Under the bill as passed by the Senate the man has 
to buy the button. He does not have to buy it and he doesn't have 
to wear it if he doesn't want to. 

Mr. McKenzie. Don't you think, Mr. Rogers, it would be a very 
wise thing to confine this to men who have been exempted on the 
ground of physical disability? If you are going to do it at all, 
wouldn't that be a wise thing? 



BUTTONS OR BADGES FOR EXEMPTED PERSONS, ETC. 5 

Mr. Rogers. That is clearly the strongest case. But take the case 
of a man with a wife and five children. 

Mr. McKenzie. He would only have to take those along with him 
and that would be sufficient argument that he was entitled to be ex- 
empted. 

Mr. Rogers. It is pretty hard, I think, to say that he is in a differ- 
ent category from a man who is exempted for physical conditions. 

Mr. Garrett. I want to hear you on the argument suggested by 
Judge Wise. The department has decided — the Provost Marshal 
General and all orders are issued in compliance with that — that the 
Army is to be called under the selective draft by classes. It has been 
classified and given their classes, and it is also now well known that 
the policy is that class I shall beexhausted ever} where before class :i 
is invaded anywhere. I think that is almost the words of Gen. 
Crowder, except in special cases. If a man is not in class f the rules 
of the War Department and the orders of the Provost Marshal Gen- 
eral have placed him where he is. He has been put there by the au- 
thorities of his Government and they are not ready for him yet. 
Why should that man be required to do anything? The very fact 
that he is at home among his people and everybody knows he is not 
in class 1 is evidence itself that he has not yet been called to service- 
but is waiting till all the other classes ahead of him have been ex- 
hausted. The very fact he is not in the war unless he is in class 1, 
and the only reason he should wear a button in class 1 is that he is in 
class 1 and has not yet been called. But all the other classes are de- 
ferred by publication of the War Department, and I want to hear 
you On that line. 

Mr. Rogers. I think that suggestion has a great deal of force, and 
I think the suggestion of Judge Wise that after all nobody is ex- 
empted to-day has a great deal of force also. 

I call your attention, however, to the statement of the Secretary 
of War to this committee and to Congress which reads as follows: 

An exemption badge or button, which may be worn by men of military age 
drafted into the military service bat subsequently exempted therefrom, or 
who have volunteered or may hereafter volunteer for military service but have 
been or shall hereafter be rejected for any cause, seems necessary in order that 
such men may have something official to show they are not slackers. 

Of course, this Senate bill of which I speak and which has the 
sanction of the War Department provides for both volunteers and 
drafted men. Possibly the suggestions made by this committee come 
pretty near knocking out drafted men altogether. I hope, however, 
you will care at least for the rejected volunteers. 

Mr. Garrett. That is where the distinction comes between the ex- 
emption and being deferred. If a man has been called and rejected 
for some physical reason that he is physically unfit, if those physical 
defects are apparent the very fact that he walks around among his 
fellow men with those defects is notice to the world that he is not 
subject to call, or has been exempted. If you limit it at all to that 
class, it might not be so bad, because that man carries his disability 
with him, but he carries that button simply to say that I was called 
but they decided I wasn't the man they wanted to go. 

Mr. McKenzie. But you wouldn't want that compulsory. 

Mr. Rogers. After all, the class we want to reach most is the 
volunteer that is rejected. 



b BUTTONS OB BADGES FOR EXEMPTED PERSONS, ETC. 

Mr. Shallenberger. Hasn't this idea you are advancing come 
about by reason of the fact that in England before they had con- 
scription there was a great deal of pressure made upon men to 
volunteer and a great many of them did volunteer as you have stated, 
and in order to protect those men from this "white-feather" busi- 
ness they did authorize the wearing of some sort of badge to show 
that a man had volunteered and had been rejected, and according 
to that it appears there is good warrant for it, bill so far as a man 
drafted, he is exempted by law or temporarily exempted by regula- 
tions. Therefore the reason he is not wearing the uniform is not 
his own reason. So the bill was made to apply to men who have 
volunteered and have been rejected. I think they would have a 
different standing entirely than the one who applied to — 

Mr. Eogers (interposing). I am just dealing with an official rec- 
ommendation of the War Department. This isn't my bill and I 
didn't propose it. It does strike me that the suggestions of the 
members of the committee are sound and I am frank to say I concur 
in them so far as draft men are concerned, unless they are actually 
exempted and not merely put into a deferred classification. 

The bill which I did introduce, however, is -,\ bill to authorize the 
Secretary to provide a distinctive badge or button to men who 
since April 6, 1017. have been honorably discharged from the armed 
forces of the United States. If 1 may make a personal illustration 
in this connection, my wife is one of two authorized visitors of the 
Government at the Walter Reed Hospital. She goes out and spends 
all day going about among the men. There are a good many who 
have come back disabled from Hen. Pershing's force-. There are 
more, of course — the total population of the hospital, I think, being 
1,700 to-day — who have fallen ill in this country while on duty. 
One thing that those men ask about, she tells me, is whether, when 
they have been honorably discharged from the service of their 
country because of their disabilities, they are going to be able to show- 
in some external way the fact of their service. They, of course, will 
have their discharge papers, but the discharge papers will not be 
visible to the world, and what those men want is. in my wife's 
opinion— and she wanted to come before 1 this committee and tell you 
so — that they be permitted to wear a button or something to show 
their neighbors at all times they have rendered this honorable sen ice. 

I have limited this, as you will see, to men who have been dis- 
charged since April 0. 1017. the date of the declaration of war. and 
have limited it also to men who have been honorably discharged from 
the service of the United State-. A- I said when I offered this 
amendment to your appropriation bill the other day on the floOr of 
the House, England has recognized the noed of a badge or button of 
this kind. I have a letter here from a British officer, a friend of 
mine, connected with the British military mission here, who says that 
badges are still being issued to men who have served in the army and 
have been discharged on account of illness or wounds. These badges 
are a very conspicuous feature of the landscape in Great Britain. 
Everywhere one sees the large badges, nickel plated, which men are 
permitted to wear on their lapels, measuring possibly 3 inches high 
by 2 inches across. It isn't dissimilar in appearance and artistic 
design to the policeman's badge. Everywhere you go men are wear- 



BUTTONS OR BADGES FOB EXEMPTED PERSONS, ETC. / 

ing that badge to show that they have done their part in the war and 
through no fault of their own they have been discharged from the 
service of Great Britain. That is all I care to say on that bill. 

Mr. McKenzie. That would only be useful and serviceable during 
the continuance of the war because when the war was over any man 
who has been in the war would be entitled to wear a button of the 
great army of the country, no doubt about that. I can sec where 
they would be useful while the war is going on. 

Mr. Rogers. You mean after the war is over there will be a society 
similar to the Grand Army of the Republic? 

Mr. McKenzie. Yes. sir. Or the Spanish-American War Vet- 
erans. 

Mr. Rogers. But does it follow that a man would not wish to wear 
both just as a man may wear several ribbons on the breast of his 
coat? T confess that it doesn't seem to me that the utility of these 
present buttons would cease when the war ceases and this great 
patriotic society of veterans is formed. 

Mr. Garrett. Don't you make a marked distinction there between 
the badges you suggest — and you suggest a service badge — the other 
badges are simply badges of nonservice. T can very readily see why 
a man who has been honorably discharged would like to have his 
badge that he has been in the service and is now out and this is the 
reason that he is out. 

Mr. Rogers. The bill which I discussed first is the War Depart- 
ment's bill and not mine. I favor it so far as the rejected volunteer 
and the actually exempted draft man are concerned. I quite agree 
that the second proposal is vastly more meritorious and important 
than the first. This is a badge of actual service. The other is not. 

Mr. Shallenberger. Would you accept the suggestion of Mr. 
McKenzie that this badge be provided for the time of the Avar — that 
they wear this badge during the time of the war — and after the war 
is over every man who has served his country, whether he is wounded 
or not, will have his war-service badge? 

Mr. Rogers. Would it be taken away from him then? 

Mr. Shallexberger. I don't know whether it would be taken away 
from him or not. 

Mr. Rogers. T don't think there would be any serious objection 
to that. 

The Chairman. You have another lull here, Mr. Rogers. 

Mr. Rogers. That will take me just two minutes to allude to. 

The following figures are taken from the report of the Provost 
Marshal General, dated December 20. 1917: 

.Men called, 8.082,949. 

Not certified, 2,025,586; 65.70 per cent. 

Reg. physically, 730,756; 23.70'per cent. 

Exempted mi- discharged on claims, 1,2J>4,830; ' 41.99 per cent. 

Total certified cither finally or awaiting appeal, 1,057,363; 34.30 per cent. 

The figure for local-board exemptions is 1,161.200 : 

Dependency. 859,150 ; 73.99 per cent. 
Alienage, 228,452; 19.67 per cent. 
Vocations, 67,716; 5.83 per cent. 
Religion, 3.SS7 ; 0.84 per cent. 
Moral nntitness. 12.001: 0.17 per cent. 



1 Likely to be increased to 1.302,729. 



8 BUTTONS OR BADGES FOR EXEMPTED PERSONS, ETC. 

DISCHARGED SOLDIERS. 

[Great Britain, Parliamentary Debates, House of Commons, May 7, 1918; p. 1882.] 

Col. Ashley asked the undersecretary of state for war whether he is aware 
that Lance Corp. (Acting Serg. ) George Edwards, No. 4728, Scots Guards, 
enlisted in the Scots Guards on December 22, 1902: that he served two periods 
overseas and was wounded ; that he was discharged time expired on Decem- 
ber 21, 1915 ; that his application for a silver badge has been refused ; and why 
this man was not discharged under paragraph 392 (XVI). 

Mr. MacPhekson. I am informed that Lance Corp. Edwards was discharged 
under paragraph 892 (XXI), King's Regulations, on the termination of his 
engagement. As he now claims to be suffering from a disability due to his 
military service, arrangements are being made for him to be examined by a 
medical board, and his case submitted to the ministry of pensions for considera- 
tion. If the medical board decide that he is permanently unfit for further 
military service, he will be eligible for the silver war badge, and will receive 
it on application. As regards the last part of my honorable and gallant 
friend's question, Edwards was discharged during the early part of the war, 
and was not medically boarded. All soldiers are now examined by a medical 
board before discharge, whatever the reason for discharge. 

Col. Ashley asked the undersecretary of state of war whether he is aware that 
Driver X. Allan. No. 710117. Third East Lancashire Brigade, Royal Field 
Artillery, served in the Egyptian expeditionary force ; that he was attached to 
the expeditionary force ; that he suffered from fever contracted abroad ; and 
that lie was discharged on March 24, 1917, under paragraph 392 (XXI), King's 
Regulations; and why this man was not discharged under paragraph 392 (XVI). 

Mr. MacPherson. I am making inquiries into the facts of this case, and v ill 
inform my honorable anil gallant friend of the result as soon as possible. u 



SIl.VEK BADGE OF HONOB FOR WOUNDED RETURNED TO CIVIL LIFE. 

;(' 

We understand that the silver badge for officers and men of the forces w ,,■ 
have retired or been discharged on account of physical infirmity arising frc 7 
wounds or sickness, a reproduction of which, with full particulars, appeared 
the Times of July 24. will be issued early next week. The greater proportion r 
the badges have already been manufactured, and the distribution will be mat • 
as rapidly as possible. The distribution to Dominion and colonial soldiers wi - 
be made through the headquarters of the overseas units. 1 

The issue of the badge was announced yesterday in the following arm 
order : 

"Silver war badge: His Majesty the King has approved the issue of a silvei 
war badge to officers and men of the British, Indian, and overseas forces wh ' 
have served at home or abroad since August 4, 1914, and who on account o 
age. or physical infirmity arising from wounds, or sickness caused by militar; 
service have, in the case of officers, retired or relinquished their commission? 
or, in the case of men, been discharged from the army." (The Times, Thurs 
day. Sept. 14. 1910.) 



[The Times. Saturday. Sept. 16. 1010.1 
SILVER WAR BADGES — RUFFS Foil APPLICANTS. 

The secretary of the war office makes the following announcement: 
" The following instructions are issued by the army council regarding the 
issue of the silver badge to officers and others of the imperial military forces 
who have served since August 4, 1914. and who, on account of old age, or physi- 
cal infirmity arising from wounds or sickness caused by military service, have, 
in the case of officers, retired, or relinquished their commissions, in the case of 
men, been discharged from the army, or in the case of the others mentioned 
below, relinquished their military employment. 

"Soldiers who were discharged under paragraph 392 (iii) King's Regula- 
tions as 'not likely to become efficient soldiers' and territorial force soldiers 
who were discharged with less than six months' service under paragraph 156 



BUTTONS OR BADGES FOR EXEMPTED PERSONS, ETC. 9 

(11) Territorial Force Regulations as 'medically unfit for further military 
service' are ineligible for the award of the badge unless their disability can 
be clearly attributed to military service. 

"Applications from individuals should be submitted as follows: 
" By officers, to the secretary, war office. 
"By nurses, to the secretary, war office. 

" By members of voluntary aid detachments, to their county association. 
•'By civilians who served with the Royal Army Medical Corps under a fixed 
agreement for a period of service, to tbe deputy director of medical services of 
the command in which they served. 

" By other civilians who have been employed with the armies overseas, pro- 
vided such employment received official recognition, to the secretary, war office. 
" By soldiei's of the regular army and special reserve (standing regimental 
number, rank, corps last served in. date of enlistment, and dale and cause of 
discharge), to the officer in charge of records of tbe unit in which they have 
served. 

" By soldiers of the territorial forces, to the officer in charge of records of 
the county unit in which they have served.. 

" If any doubt exists as to the correct address, application should be made 
for a leaflet containing full instructions, which will be available at all post 
offices within the next few days. 

" Officers of the Indian Army, officers of the Indian Army Reserve, officers 
of the Indian Medical Service, officers and warrant officers of Indian Army 
Departments, officers of tbe Royal Indian Marine, and members of Queen Alex- 
andra's Military Nursing Service for India who have been invalided from the 
service and are resident in this country should apply to the undersecretary of 
state, India office, for the grant of the badges. 

£ Those who are residing in India should apply to the secretary to the Gov- 
*ment of India, army department. 

m Issue to naval forces. — The following instructions are issued by the Admi- 
IL ty regarding the issue of the badge to those who have served in his Majesty's 
ai val forces since August 4, 1914, whose service has been terminated on ac- 
t], tint of wounds or on account of physical infirmity for which they are not 
ii emselves directly responsible. 
" "Men with less than six months' service are ineligible for the award unless 
fie disability is clearly attributable to their naval service. 
B "The award will include the following: Officers and men of the Royal Navy, 
f oyal Marines, and Naval Forces of the Dominions, Royal Fleet Reserve, Royal 
• .'aval Reserve, Royal. Naval Volunteer Reserve, and Royal Naval Auxiliary 
lick Berth Reserve, officers and men of the mercantile marine serving under 
Special engagements in his Majesty's commissioned ships. Members of Queen 
Alexandra's Royal Naval Nursing Service and Reserve. Officiating ministers, 
•ivilian medical practitioners, and dental surgeons, who have given whole time 
service. Forms of application for the badge may be obtained from the Account- 
ant General of the Navy (medal branch), Admiralty, London, S. YV. 

WAR-SERVICE BADGES — ENGLAND AND IRELAND. 
[The munitions (war-service badges) rules, 1915. Dated Oct. 9, 1915. 1 1915. No. 1001.] 

In pursuance of section S of the munitions-of-war act, 1915 (5 and 6 Geo., 5, 
c. .14), the minister of munitions hereby makes as statutory rules 1 the following 
rules as to war-service badges in England and Ireland: 

Whereas it is provided by section 8 of the munitions-of-war act. 1915, that — 

"(1) The minister of munitions may make rules authorizing the wearing of 
badges or other distinctive marks by persons engaged on munitions work or 
other work for war purposes, and as to the issue and return of any such badges 
I or marks, and may by those rules prohibit the use, wearing, or issue of any 
i such badges, or any badges or marks indicating or suggesting that any person 
is engaged on munitions work or work for war purposes, except as authorized 
by those rules. 

"(2) If any person acts in contravention or fails to comply with any such 
rules, he shall be guilty of an offense against this act." 

1 These statutory rules are in identical terms with the munitions (war-service badges) 
rules, 1915, which were made as provisional rules on July 23, 1915, and were in force 
from that date until the coming: into force of these statutory rules. (See sec. 2 of the 
rules publications act, 1893.) 



10 BUTTONS OR BADGES FOR EXEMPTED PERSONS, ETC. 

And whereas it is provided by .section 14 of the same act that any person 
guilty of such an offense shall be liable, In respect of each offense, to a fine 
not exceeding £50, the following rules have been made by the minister of 
munitions : 

(1) The employer of any persons engaged on munitions work or other work 
for war purposes may make application to the minister on a form giving the 
particulars set out in the schedule hereto or such other particulars as the 
minister may require from time to time for authority to issue war-service 
badges to such persons in accordance with these rules. 

CJ.) The minister may grant such application in respect of all or any of the 
persons included therein, and may supply war-service badges to the employer 
and authorize their issue by the employer to such persons accordingly (on 
such condition as lie thinks tit). Provided, That he shall not authorize the 
issue of war-service badges to persons engaged otherwise than in a Government 
establishment unless, having regard to the occupations in which such persons 
are employed, he is of opinion that their removal from their present employ- 
ment is likely to prejudice the production, transport, or supply of munitions of 
war, or the successful prosecution of the war. 

(3) A person to whom a war-service badge lias been issued by his employer 
in accordance with these rules shall he entitled to wear the badge only so long 
as the authority under winch it was issued remains in force and so long as he 
remains engaged on munitions work or other work for war purposes in the 
service of that employer, and when for any cause he is no longer entitled to 
wear the badge, he shall forthwith surrender it to his employer. 

I ) An employer to whom war-service badges have been supplied by the 
minister shall lie responsible (a) for issuing such badges in accordance 
with these rules and the authority given by the minister; (b) for requiring 
the surrender of any such badge as soon as the person to whom it was issued 
ceases to be entitled to wear it; (c) for the custody of any such badges sup- 
plied to him, but not issued or surrendered to him, and for their return to the 
minister if so required. 

(5) Any authority given by the minister to any employer to issue war- 
service badges to any person or persons employed by him may be revoked at any 
time by notice in writing given to the employer. 

((i) No person shall make any false statement for the purpose of securing 
authority to issue, or for the purpose of obtaining, any war-service badge. No 
person shall issue any war-service badge to any person, except in accordance 
with these rules and with authority given to him by the minister, and no per- 
son shall wear such badge unless it has been issued to him by bis employer 
in accordance with these rules. And no such badge shall be sold or bought, 
pawned or accepted in pawn, or otherwise disposed of or received by any per- 
son, except in so far as duly authorized. 

Provided that where a person in good faith wears a war-service badge issued 
to him by his employer, believing himself to be entitled to do so. he shall not 
be deemed to have acted in contravention of these rules merely on the ground 
that the badge was wrongfully issued to him by his employer or that lie is no 
longer entitled to wear it. 

(7) No person shall, except with the express authority of the minister, make. 
sell, issue, or wear any badge similar in form or appearance to any badge sup- 
plied or authorized by the minister, or any colorable imitation thereof, or any 
badge or other distinctive mark calculated or intended to suggest that the 
wearer thereof is engaged on munitions work or other work for war purposes. 

(8) Anv person to whom before the date of these rules any badge was issued 
by or with the express authority of the Admiralty or Army Council may, any- 
tiling in these rules to the contrary notwithstanding, continue to wear such 
badge so long as he remains in his present employment, until such date, not 
being earlier than the 30th day of September, as the minister may determine, 
either generally or in any particular case or class of cases. 

(!>) Anv war-service badge supplied by the authority of the minister of muni- 
tions in accordance with these rules shall remain the property of the minister 
and shall be returned to him at any time if so required by him. 

I 10) In these rules — 

The expression "minister" means "minister of munitions." 

The expression " war-service badge" means any badge or other distinctive 
mark authorized by the minister for the purpose of indicating that the wearer 
thereof is engaged on munition work or other work for war purposes. 



BUTTONS OR BADGES FOR EXEMPTED PERSONS, ETC. 11 

The expression "Government establishment" means any establishment owned 
by the Crown or of which the governing body is appointed by any Government 
department. 

(11) These rules may be cited as the munitions (war-service badges) rules, 
1 1t 1 r>. and shall come into force on the date thereof. 

Signed on behalf of the minister of munitions this 9th day of October, 1915. 

H. Llewellen Smith, 

Secretary. 
Ministry of Munitions, 

6 Whitehall Gardens, SW. 

SCHEDULE. 

Particulars to be furnished on application for authority to issue war-service 
badges : 

1. Full name and address of person making application. 

2. Number of badges applied for. 

:;. In the case of an application made on behalf of an establishment not being 
a Government establishment, occupation and place of employment of each 
person employed in respect of whom application is made. 

On the 2d of March I introduced a bill (H. R. 105-22) authorizing 
the Secretary of War to reimburse officers, enlisted men. and civilian 
employees in the Military Establishment for certain disbursements 
while on furlough, necessitated by disabilities originating in the serv- 
ice and in line of duty. 

At my request the chairman of this committee referred the bill to 
the War Department, and under date of March 26 the Acting Sec- 
retary. Mr. Crowell, sent his opinion of the bill. He was inclined to 
favor the bill in principle, but he suggested several modifications 
which he drew up in the form of a new bill. I, therefore, on April 
10, reintroduced a bill, which is now H. R. 11366. and is the bill upon 
which I wish to stand this morning. 

A man is on duty at a military post — this is a case, by the way. 
gentlemen, that came in my mail yesterday. It is typical, perhaps, 
of a half a dozen or a dozen I have knowledge of in my own congres- 
sional district. A man feels very miserable on the military post. 
He isn't ill, but he is wretched. He asks and obtains a furlough of 
48 hours to go home. He starts off, arrives at his home, and is found 
to be very ill with a high fever when he gets there. Pneumonia has 
developed. He is away from his superior officer. His family doesn't 
know what to do. They call a doctor. The doctor puts him in a 
hospital and it is found he has pneumonia. He may be there for 
weeks and months incurring hospital charges and doctor's bills. 

Under the law as it stands to-day the Government hasn't the power 
to pay one cent. That young man or his family has to meet the hos- 
pital and medical bills. H. R. 11366, which I have introduced, simply 
provides that the Secretary of War may prescribe rules and regula- 
tions providing for the employment of civilian medical service, in- 
cluding care and subsistence in private hospitals, for officers, enlisted 
men. and civilian employees on leave of absence or furlough or other- 
wise absent with leave from the status of duty. I understand that 
the present Surgeon General and every Surgeon General preceding 
him for a score of years or more have recommended that legislation 
of this kind be passed. 

The Chairman. You left out the proviso suggested by the Acting 
Secretary of War — 

Provided, It shall be impossible or impracticable for the Medical Department 
to furnish the medical treatment. 



12 BUTTONS OR BADGES FOR EXEMPTED PERSONS, ETC. 

Mr. Rogers. That appears in the bill. I didn't take time to com- 
plete the reading of the bill. 

That is all I care to say on that. I think the merits speak for 
themselves. I thank you very much for the opportunity to be heard. 

Judge Wise. If a soldier was at home and an Army officer directed 
that he be carried to the hospital and be treated, we would have 
authority to pay now, wouldn't we? 

Mr. Rogers. I didn't think that was true. 

Mr. Thompson (representing the Surgeon General). When men 
are on furlough and are, by direction of superior military authorities, 
put on furlough for treatment, that is equivalent to the suspension 
of the furlough. 

Judge Wise. There are cases when he is going home and makes' 
no report back to his military authorities and is put in a civilian 
hospital. But when he is directed to be treated by the medical 
officer, then the Government pays for it. 

Mr. Fields. Suppose he is ordered back by his superior officer 
but is too ill to return, then what is he to do? 

Judge Wise. He could report to the Army. 

Mr. Rogers. Suppose a man gets home practically in a state of 
coma. The ordinary boy of 21 or 22 years old doesn't realize the 
obligation to report back. 

Judge Wise. Here is the part that strikes me: It ought to be a 
very dangerous thing to enact legislation along that line. A man 
goes home and might be taken sick. With this authority he might 
not be very seriously ill and his doctor would say, " You go over to 
the hospital and stay a while," and he might not be very sick and 
the Government would have to pay that expense. 

Mr. Rogers. The bill provides this shall be subject to rules and 
regulations laid down by the Secretary of War. I should suppose 
the Secretary of War would prescribe that he could have a review 
in all cases and if he didn't want to he need not pay the bill. 

Judge Wise. I think that when he is in a hospital a report ought 
to be made to his command as to where he is and what is the matter 
with him, and his command ought to be able to direct him to be 
treated and pay for it. I don't think it ought to be said that a man 
could be sent to a hospital and stay there indefinitely and charge it 
to the Government. 

Mr. Rogers. If I may I would like to incorporate into the record 
these two letters which bear directly upon this bill, one from the 
Acting Secretary of War to the committee and the other from the 
Surgeon General to me. They are not very long. 

The Chairman. All right. I will state the Surgeon General was 
here this morning and he is heartily in favor of this measure. 

War Department, 
Office ok the Svrgeon General. 

Washington, March I. 1918. 
Hon. Johx Jacob Rogers, 

Hoii.se of Representatives, Washington, /». C. 
My Dear Mr. Rogers: I have the honor to acknowledge the receipt of your 
favor of the 25th ultimo respecting certain medical expenses incurred on behalf 
of Harry A. Smith, a soldier, while on furlough, and regret to inform you that 
payment thereof from public funds is forbidden by law. 

A great number of such cases arose during the Spanish-American War, and 
Surg. Gen. Sternherg called attention to their merit by letter of December 6, 



BUTTONS OR BADGES FOR EXEMPTED PERSONS, ETC. 13 

1899, to the Secretary of War, published in Senate Report No, .182. Fifty-seventh 
Congress, first session ; but no legislation was ever enacted authorizing payment 
of the bills by the United States. 

The Army appropriations for Medical and Hospital Department for the fiscal 
years 1900 and 1901 were expressed in very brief terms, which resulted in some 
administrative embarrassments. In proposing estimates for 1002 the Surgeon 
General asked that the terms be amplified, and that they include specifically a 
term "for medical care and treatment not otherwise provided for of officers and 
enlisted men of the Army, and of prisoners of war and other persons in military 
custody or confinement, under such regulations as shall have been or shall be 
prescribed by the Secretary of War." He explained this term by note as fol- 
lows: "The provision for medical care and treatment of officers' and enlisted 
men as contained in former laws covered the cases only of those ' on duty at 
posts and stations for which no other provision is made.' " During the Spanish 
War it was necessary in many cases to send convalescents home on leave of 
absence or furlough in order that more serious cases might be taken care of at 
the front. It has been held that under the phraseology quoted their medical 
expenses could not be paid by the Government, although they were sent home for 
the convenience of the Government, and were suffering from disabilities origi- 
nating in the service and in the line of duty. The phraseology proposed above 
would enable the Secretary of War to provide by suitable regulations for such 
and similar cases occurring during 1902. 

This phraseology was favorably reported to the House (Report 2654. Feb. 4. 
1901) but was objected to on the floor on the ground that it would provide for 
the medical treatment of officers and men on furlough (Record, vol. 34! No. 52, 
p. 2558) ; and it did not become law, the term finally adopted being " for medical" 
care and treatment of officers and enlisted men of the Army on duty * * * 
at posts and stations for which no other provision is made, under such regula- 
tions as shall have been or shall be prescribed by the Secretary of War." (Act 
Mar. 2, 1901, 31 Stats. 908.) 

In submitting estimates for 1908 the Surgeon General proposed the following 
term in lieu of that last above quoted: "For medical care and treatment not 
otherwise provided for, including care and subsistence in private hospitals, of 
officers, enlisted men. and civilian employees of the Army * * * when 
entitled thereto by law, regulation, or contract." Congress accepted this 
phraseology, but qualified it by adding a proviso, " That this shall not apply 
to officers and enlisted men who are treated in private hospitals or by civilian 
physicians while on furlough." (Act Mar. 2, 1907, 34 Stats. 1172.) Tins pro- 
viso was, it is understood, added upon the initiative recommendation of the 
House Committee on Military Affairs. Had it not been added the Secretary of 
War would have been left free by appropriate regulations to provide for civilian 
medical service for officers and soldiers on leave suffering from disabilities in- 
curred in the line of duty. 

Current appropriations for Medical and Hospital Department are likewise 
qualified and limited by a similar proviso. It will be noted from the above 
history that this proviso represents a legislative policy of long standing, which 
can be reversed only by the action of Congress. 
Very truly, yours, 

W. C. Gokgas, Surgeon General, 
By Carl R. Darnall, 

Colonel, Medical Corps. 

War Department, 
Washington, March 26, WIS. 
To the Chairman Committee on Military Affairs, 

House of Representatives. 
Sir: I have the honor to acknowledge receipt of House bill 10522, referred 
to me with the request for any information relating thereto in the possession 
of the War Department. 

Many Surgeons General have in the past frequently urged the equity of the 
assumption by the Government under some circumstances of medical expenses 
of officers and soldiers incurred while for the time being in the status of absence 
with leave from duty. 

It is, of course, impossible to see whether our Medical Department will be 
able to handle efficiently all disabled men. It may be found necessary to accept 
the services of private hospitals and civilian physicians during the course of 



14 BUTTONS OR BADGES FOR EXEMPTED PERSONS, ETC. 

the war. If the employment of such private services is placed within the 
control of the Secretary of War it is assured there will he no unnecessary 
expense incidental to such service. 

I notice, however, that the hill provides for the reimbursemenl of officers, 
enlisted men. and civilian employees in the Military Establishment for actual 
disbursements made by them. It would he preferable were the services paid 
directly from public funds rather than to have the payment made in the hirst 
place by private individuals and claims then made over against public funds. 

I. therefore, recommend the following legislation in place of the hill as 
submitted : 

•' A BILL Authorizing the Secretary of War to provide for medical treatment and" 
hospital care of officers, enlisted men, and civilian employees in the Military Establish- 
ment while on furlough, necessitated by the disability originating in the line of duty. 

•'Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the I nited 
states of America in Congress assembled. That the Secretary of War may. 
under rules and regulations to he prescribed by him, provide for the employ- 
ment of civilian medical service, including care and subsistence in the private 
hospitals, for officers, enlisted men. and civilian employees of the Army, on 
leave of absence or furlough or otherwise absent with leave from the status of 
duty: Provided, that it shall he impossible or impracticable for the Medical 
Department to furnish the necessary medical treatment and hospital care, and 
that the disabilities necessitating such service shall have originated in the line 
of duty." 

Respectfully. 

Benedict < Jrowell, 
Acting Secretory of War. 

The Chairman. Have you any additional suggestion to make on 
this bill, Mr. Thompson? 

Mr. Thompson. The letter that Mr. Rogers is going to leave you, 
marked "1," from the Surgeon General, gives something of the his- 
tory of this measure for the last 20 years. I have made something 
of a study of the history of this legislation showing that the Senate 
has passed such a measure some, three times 12 years ago, but it never 
got a real hearing on the floor of the House. 

As to bill H. R. 11366, three questions occur to me : First, is it an 
entirely perspective measure by its terms, and it is not sure it will be 
operative on bills for civilian medical service rendered before its 
approval. It wouldn't apply to Mr. Rogers's constituent. The sec- 
ond is that his proposed law does not purpose to carry an appropri- 
ation. As it is it may pass the House, and there is no money appro- 
priated. The regular medical and hospital funds not being appli- 
cable to such bills on account of the provisos therein because of no 

The Chairman (interposing). It would have to go to the Appro- 
priations Committee. I submitted that to Gen. Gorgas this morning. 
Will you put those suggestions in the record ? 

Mr. Thompson. Yes, sir. 

NOTES o.N H. B. L1366, SIXTY-FIFTH CONGRESS, SECOND SESSION. 

1. This measure appears to he entirely prospective in its terms. Query 
whether it would he operative on hills for civilian medical service procured 
before its approval? 

2. The proposed law does not purport to carry an appropriation. Query, 
what fund, if nay, would be applicable to the extinguishment of claims there- 
under in view of the specific prohibition made by proviso in the appropriation 
for medical and hospital departments against the use of that appropriation in 
payment of such claims? 

.3. If the proviso mentioned were omitted from the 1919 appropriation now 
pending the Secretary of War would be able by appropriate regulations to pro- 
vide during 1919 for such claims without further legislation. 



BUTTONS OB BADGES FOR EXEMPTED PERSONS, ETC. 15 

STATEMENT OF MAJ. T. W. CARRITHERS, OF THE GENERAL 
STAFF, UNITED STATES ARMY. 

Maj. Carrithers. The General Start' made a study of Mr. Rogers' 
bill which provides for reimbursement. The second bill was made or 
drafted after a staff study to not provide reimbursement because a 
man might not have the money. It would make a hardship on the 
man and involve a lot or red tape, and it would be much easier to 
authorize the payment by the War Department of those bills. 

The Surgeon General brought that point up, and in the start study. 
I may quote a part of it : 

We may Mini in the course of this war thai our Military hospitals and sur- 
geons will not always he able to care for all of the lisahled. and il inaj he neces- 
sary at times to accept services of private hospitals and civilian physicians. 

At this point I would like to suggest that possibly there are cases— 
we have merely gotten into this war; the wounded are beginning to 
come home — at places on the Atlantic coast it may be easier to let a 
man go home if his home is near than to keep him there with a hos- 
pital floor nurse, doctor, and so on. and vacate his bed for somebody 
else. It may be necessary to leave it to regulations by the Secretary 
of War. 

Inasmuch as the bill proposed by the Surgeon General leaves the matter en- 
tirely in the hands of the Secretary of War. the proceeding is nol liable to entail 
any unnecessary expense. 

The War Department drafted the bill and recommended it as it now 
stands. It meets with the approval of the Secretary of War in its 
present form, and, if passed, I think that regulations will be drawn so 
as to minimize any abuse of the bill. 

The chairman has suggested that possibly the bill might be abused. 
I think that the regulations as drawn will minimize the abuses. 

Dr. Kepper. The question of badges is a matter that I happen to 
know about all the facts. Mr. Baker asked me to look into it. There 
is great public demand for some kind of recognition. There is no 
doubt about that. The matter has been up before the Council of 
National Defense on two or three occasions. I had a talk with Mr. 
Gifford, and it is perfectly evident if you start to make general rec- 
ognition of what one man is doing and the value of that to the Nation 
you are coming to the point where there are doubtful cases and. fur- 
ther, the man is getting better pay than before'. The council has come 
to the conclusion, in which Mr. Baker concurs, that no genera] plan of 
recognition is possible. On the other hand, of this legislation which 
is before you, the colonel can speak in detail much more than I can. 
If a way can be found to recognize these young men and make them 
feel comfortable in their goings and coming-- I think it is a very im- 
portant thing for the morale. 

Of course, my own opinion is, since the receipt of the cablegram 
from Gen. Pershing which started this whole question, based upon 
what recognition had already been given in England, since that time 
within the selective service, the policy of the department, with the 
approval of the committee with regard to the draft has been consider- 
ably changed. I think the word " exemption " was used in the earlier 
discussions as to how the draft should operate. After a certain time 
the plan of grouping men in certain classes with the understanding 



16 BUTTONS OR BADGES FOR EXEMPTED PERSONS, ETC. 

that so far as possible they will be drawn in order from their classes, 
class 5 being the only one that is exempt, is in actual operation, and I 
do not think it would at least be worth while to consider whether a 
man might have the right to wear, if he so desires, some kind of badge 
to indicate why he is not in the service of the country. That would 
save him from embarrassment on street cars and other public places. 
I think it would be useful. 

I came down to speak on the very particular desire among the 
people to have some land of recognition. Hardly a day passes but 
what Ave get some resolution adopted by some volunteer organization. 

The Chairman. That is a very practical way to go at it. 

Judge Wise. A man under the rules now, if they know he is not in 
the service, but the minute he puts the badge on shows he has been 
deferred by his own statement and questionnaire, he will be subjected 
to embarrassment in his community by advertising the fact that he 
is not in the service, and everybody will want to know why. 

Mr. Caldwell. There is no way a man can dodge now if the law is 
being administered, and it is being administered in a very wonderful 
way. If he isn't gone his time hasn't come. That is a natural suppo- 
sition. Of course, a man that has been in the service and has been 
discharged, he might wear a badge of honor that he has done his 
service is something that you might consider a thing that is due him. 
But what are you going to do about the men that are drafted and 
sent to the camp, and two days after they get there they are found not 
physically fit? They are honestly discharged for physical incapacity. 
Are you going to give a man who has gone across to the other side a 
badge and give his physical discharge for injuries received in line of 
duty and be putting him in the same class with these other men? 
Would you be giving him equal showing? Doesn't that destroy the 
honor coming to the man that has been discharged because he has 
been shot? 

Maj. Wetllie. I think it does make a distinct difference. I think 
under the wording of the two bills they overlap, because actually if 
they are called into service and are carried into camps, then when 
they are released from the camps they are given a discharge for dis- 
abilities, so they could get the badge of Mr. Rogers's bill. On the 
other hand, they could also get this other one, because they are men 
who have been called and subsequently exempted in accordance with 
law. I think there might be a distinction drawn in there very well, 
because those men would come under these classes in both of these 
bills. 

Mr. Rogers. I would just like to make an inquiry in connection 
with that suggestion. Is it possible that one man can be both ex- 
empted and discharged? 

Maj. Weyllie. They have to be. If they are called by the local 
board and passed by the local board and go to camp, they are then 
put in the service. 

The Chairman. When he takes the train under orders he is in the 
service. 

Maj. Weyllie. Yes. They are called and subsequently exempted. 
They are exempted by means of the discharge. That brings them in 
under your bill, Mr. Rogers. But the meaning of this other bill 
was to take care of just such men. 



BUTTONS OB BADGES FOR EXEMPTED PERSONS, ETC. 17 

Mr. Caldwell. I will show you a very glaring instance of this. A 
young man that came back over here the other day in the House 
document room ; his leg was shot off. We give him a badge of honor, 
showing he was discharged on account of this thing. It is something 
he might wear with a great deal of pride, even though he has his leg 
off to show for it, but it shows the leg is off fighting for his country. 
When the draft law was first put into operation, among the first 
men that were sent to Camp Meade was a man with a wooden leg, 
and after he had been there several days, even with a uniform on, 
it was discovered he was physically unfit. Are you going to put a 
badge on this man the same as you would the other one? 

Mr. Sogers. My hat is off to the Camp Meade man, who tried his 
best to get into the service. And isn't it after all a question of the 
parable of the husbandman in paying the eleventh-hour man the 
penny just the same he paid the man who had borne the burden and 
heat of the day? 

You can't ever in this world absolutely judge equality of service or 
reward. And these men who have fallen here a week after their 
services have begun, of meningitis or pneumonia, or whatever it 
was, never having gone to France, never to be able to go to France, 
are they to be deprived of their honor even though they didn't go 
overseas. They have done what they could. 

Mr. Caldwell. That is all right, and that is absolutely all right. 
As far as the man that was cited with his leg off, he is entitled to ?v 
great deal of credit. 

(Thereupon the committee, at 12.45 p. m., adjourned.) 

66935—18 2 



LIBRARY OF CONGRESS 



011 521 85 



III II L 

1 ?• 



iiiiii mil in 





Hoi 



LIBRARY OF CONGRESS 




I II llll I 
011 521 851 7 



•, 



Hollinger Corp. 
pH 8.5 



